Thursday, February 26, 2009

Many Americans and Europeans do not want their countrymen to hear about the sad experience of contemporary Islam in Europe. Nevertheless, Geert Wilders and others of similar courage are willing to speak publicly about the violent primitivism of the Muslim incursion into Europe's cities. It is time for modern westerners -- long dumbed down and lulled to sleep by their educators and decadent culture of appeasement -- to wake up and comprehend the mess they have allowed themselves to stumble into.

Islam is a religion of violence, a religion of supremacist intolerance. It has no place in the modern world. If the governments of the west do not act through legal and procedural channels to reduce the risk, there is no doubt that much blood will be shed unnecessarily.

At least ten women were attacked and molested by a gang of Somali men at Sofienberg park in Oslo on Saturday evening.

Last year a record-high 161 rapes and 35 rape attempts were reported in Oslo. Over 70% of the rapists were non-Norwegian [ed. ethnically, a majority had Norwegian citizenship].[Somali man in Norwegian cafe]: ...when then go out almost completely naked and get completelydrunk in Frogner park or go to a party together with some friend, and then they complain about being raped? It’s their fault, says the 26 year old from Somalia. _Source

We hear the same story from Muslim men now living in Paris, Brussels, Stockholm, Melbourne, Hamburg, London . . . wherever Muslim men have immigrated into the western world. "Western women are simply asking to be raped, it is their own fault . . . ." And so gangs of Muslims rove the streets of western Europe, Australia, and wherever else the women are begging to be raped, in order to answer their desires. Or so they say.

European cities are growing increasingly Muslim through immigration and high Muslim birth rates. All it takes is 10%, or so, hostile newcomers to completely alter the political dynamics of a community. Hitler certainly started out with much less and made great strides in his political career.

Some European cities are approaching 25% or more Muslim population, well over the threshold of radical change. Since cities are the heart of a country, the entire country's politics can take a radical turn due to the Muslim influx and rapid reproduction inside its cities. The entire of western Europe may be over 25% Muslim within little more than another decade, according to a UCSD professor. (see label "european decline" below)

It's certainly a good thing that the women of Europe have the feminists of the western world looking out for them. The same goes for the gays and lesbians of Europe, who often suffer from Muslim violence.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Netherlands legislator Geert Wilders was recently deported from the UK without being allowed to give his scheduled presentation at the House of Lords. Unlike the UK, the US allowed Wilders free access to the country. The following is excerpted from his 23 Feb 2009 speech in NYC.

Thank you very much for inviting me. And – to the immigration authorities – thank you for letting me into this country. It is always a pleasure to cross a border without being sent back on the first plane.

Today, the dearest of our many freedoms is under attack all throughout Europe. Free speech is no longer a given. What we once considered a natural element of our existence, our birth right, is now something we once again have to battle for.

As you might know, I will be prosecuted, because of my film Fitna, my remarks regarding Islam, and my view concerning what some call a ‘religion of peace’. A few years from now, I might be a criminal.

...Today, I come before you to warn of a great threat. It is called Islam. It poses as a religion, but its goals are very worldly: world domination, holy war, sharia law, the end of the separation of church and state, slavery of women, the end of democracy. It is NOT a religion, it is an political ideology. It demands your respect, but has no respect for you.

There might be moderate Muslims, but there is no moderate Islam. Islam will never change, because it is built on two rocks that are forever, two fundamental beliefs that will never change, and will never alter.

...Their disdain of the West is so much greater than the appreciation of our many liberties. And therefore, they are willing to sacrifice everything. The left once stood for women rights, gay rights, equality, democracy. Now, they favour immigration policies that will end all this. Many even lost their decency. Elite politicians have no problem to participate in or finance demonstrations where settlers shout “Death to the Jews”. Seventy years after Auschwitz they know of no shame.

Two weeks ago, I tried to get into Britain, a fellow EU country. I was invited to give a speech in Parliament. However, upon arrival at London airport, I was refused entry into the UK, and sent back on the first plane to Holland. I would have loved to have reminded the audience of a great man who once spoke in the House of Commons. In 1982 President Reagan gave a speech there very few people liked. Reagan called upon the West to reject communism and defend freedom.

...Our enemies should know: we will never apologize for being free men, we will never bow for the combined forces of Mecca and the left. And we will never surrender. We stand on the shoulders of giants. There is no stronger power than the force of free men fighting for the great cause of liberty. Because freedom is the birthright of all man. _AtlasShrugs

Wilders is under 24 hour a day armed guard, particularly when in his home country, The Netherlands. That is the price of free speech for one who wishes to stay alive in Europe today. Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh paid the price for their free speech in Europe. Wilders and Ayaan Hirsi Ali are living under constant threat of Islamic violence, as is the entire continent of Europe.

Sunday, February 22, 2009

The women who most need the help of outspoken feminists are the women of Islam and other primitive tribal cultures. These women are routinely abused in every way by the men of their insular societies, and generally feel ignored by the pampered sinecured princesses of feminist quasi-nobility. Where are you princesses when these women are being beaten and beheaded? In your own minds you are courageous legends of social justice, but in reality you are contemptible cowards of self indulgent oblivion.

The crime was so brutal, shocking and rife with the worst possible stereotypes about their faith that some U.S. Muslims thought the initial reports were a hoax.

The harsh reality of what happened in an affluent suburb of Buffalo, N.Y. — the beheading of 37-year-old Aasiya Hassan and arrest of her estranged husband in the killing — is another crucible for American Muslims.

Here was a couple that appeared to be the picture of assimilation and tolerance, co-founders of a television network that aspired to improve the image of Muslims in a post 9-11 world.

..."What you have is a cultural problem our communities have been silent about too long," said Wajahat Ali, a journalist and playwright who helped drive the effort. "What [some] people.....are trying to do is say this is an example of a barbaric religion. This is an example of barbaric misogyny and domestic violence." _Newsvine

Of course the beheading of an estranged wife, consistent with innumerable terrorist and honour killings by Islamic fanatics, is indeed an example of a barbaric religion. How could it be anything else? Muslims should understand, of all people, that denial is not a river in Egypt.

But where are the F'n G-D feminists? As observed previously on Al Fin, feminists are as helpful to Muslim women as a screendoor on a submarine.

Of course if you could remove the personal risk, and provide a heady source of cash for the effort, feminists would be at the ready, Jenny on the spot.

Saturday, February 21, 2009

California has chosen a path of decline. From its leading role in the sub-prime mortgage fiasco, to its suicidal environmental, energy, and business regulations, California has chosen to go the way of populist suicide.

As California goes, says an old cliché, so goes the nation. Oh my.

These days, the Golden State leads the nation on economic and fiscal dysfunction, from the empty homes spread across the Central Valley to the highest state budget shortfall in the nation's history. Meanwhile, its political class pioneers denial in the face of catastrophe. _WSJ

California's have begun melting all the gold and silver in the family jewelry in an attempt to make up budget deficits. That $40 Billion deficit is not going away, despite a few cosmetic spending cuts and tax increases. California's government has chosen to kill the state via irresponsible budgeting and regulation, and only an angry and disciplined citizenry can turn the tables on the death-dealing state government.

The politicians aren’t entirely to blame, although at every sign of the unsustainability of the state’s fiscal practices their reaction has been to resort to more gimmicks and borrowing. California’s voters have recourse to an initiative process they have used to make responsible budgeting as hard as possible. They passed a proposition in the late 1980s that basically locked up half of state spending for the schools, no matter what. Even in November, with fiscal disaster looming, they passed another $10 billion in bonds for high-speed rail, apparently on the theory that a state can never have enough debt.

...Schwarzenegger now governs the Michigan of the West. California has the fourth-highest state unemployment rate in the nation and is routinely ranked among the worst states in its business environment. Almost 1.5 million more nonimmigrants have left the state than moved to it during the past ten years. _Lowry

Schwarzenegger and the freespending Democratic legislature and comptroller are all hoping that the Democratic Party controlled US Federal government will come through and bail the state out. They are hoping for a return to "business as usual", fleecing the taxpayers to pay the salaries and pensions of top-heavy state and local government workers.

Why can't the Governator be more like Sarah Palin or Bobby Jindal, you may ask? I suspect the answer to that question lies in the respective backgrounds, upbringings, and underlying characters of the respective governors. For a tough guy, Schwarzenegger allowed himself to be dragged down into the free-loading populist swamp far more easily than one might have thought.

California, Michigan, New York, Illinois .... The list of corrupt, zombie populist-led states stretches on, seemingly lengthening every two to four years. And now the entire US Federal Government is led by the toxic strain of zombie rot-brains. What does the future hold? Take a quick peak at the Overpaid Government Workers news aggregator blog. Understand that the misbegotten economic policies that have led to insolvency at the corporate and state levels are experiencing accelerating growth at the Federal level. The first shoe has barely begun to drop, much less the next, the next, and the next .....

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

On Nov. 4, after Barack Obama clinched the White House, the market closed at 9,625.28.

In mid-morning trading today, the day President Obama signs his massive Generational Theft Act into law and a day before he unveils a massive new mortgage entitlement, the Dow dropped to to 7,606.53.

Now, imagine if President Bush had presided over a 2,000-point stock market tumble in the same time period — during the first few months of his presidency. _MM

Actually, Obama's effect on the market goes back further and is far more profound than the quote above indicates. At mid-September 2008, the DJIA was orbiting about the 11,400 mark. Once investors realized in mid-September that Barak "Milli Vanilli" Obama was likely to be chosen by American voters, stocks began to plunge. Subtracting 7,600 from 11,400, one obtains a 3800 Obama stock crash -- so far.

In truth, Obama's destruction of capital markets is just beginning. The neo-fascist lip-synching president is doing everything precisely wrong. He is shifting the center of gravity from the private sector to the extortionate public sector. He is burning the fields, destroying all possible seeds of recovery, and salting the soil.

Rather than abolishing government marketplace distortions that brought on the current economic malaise, the new reich is solidifying them in-place, and building the distortions to catastrophic levels. Buckle up for the wildest economic roller-coaster ride of your life.

Monday, February 16, 2009

Geert Wilders was invited to deliver [an address] at the House of Lords on Thursday, February 12, 2009. Instead of making this address and showing his film Fitna, he was detained by UK immigration officials on his arrival at London Heathrow airport and sent back to the Netherlands as a risk to “public security.” _BrusselsJournal

The text of the address Wilders was to have delivered is available in full at the Brussels Journal link above. Below is a discussion in the House of Lords on the topic of Wilders' shameful deportation by the UK Home Office. [See Wilders' film Fitna]

Lord Taverne: My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question of which I have given private notice.

Lord West of Spithead [on behalf of the government]: My Lords, under European law, a member state of the European economic area may refuse entry to a national of another EEA state if they constitute a threat to public policy, public security or public health.

Lord Taverne: My Lords, I am aware that Mr Wilders holds views highly offensive to the Muslim community, but freedom of speech issues often raise awkward questions. Indeed, this ban has united in opposition the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, the Dutch Government—unusual allies—and also a section of the Muslim community which cares about freedom of expression. Does the Home Office agree that causing offence, even deep offence, to particular religious groups is no reason for compromising on the principle of freedom of expression? Why else did we repeal the laws on blasphemy? Since this is a ban on an EU citizen and Member of Parliament who has been convicted of no offence, and who has been invited to a private showing of a film in this House—not a rally in Trafalgar Square—does it not set a deeply disturbing precedent for the vital question of freedom of expression?

Lord West of Spithead: My Lords, the Government and I are great believers in freedom of expression. Indeed, I am constantly getting into trouble because I am too free with my expressions at times. But the decision was not based purely on the film “Fitna”, but also on a range of factors, including prosecution in the Netherlands for incitement and discrimination, and other statements. The Home Secretary has to make a decision, as was said, on anyone coming in if they are a threat to public policy or public security in particular. We are constantly looking at this and are very robust about it with all sorts of extremists, from whichever corner they come. I regularly, across my desk, have to give advice to the Home Secretary about stopping people coming into this country, because I do not think it is appropriate that they should be here. I think it is good that we are being robust about this, and absolutely appropriate that the Home Secretary should have made this decision.

Baroness Hanham: My Lords, there seems to be a bit of a lottery as to who is admitted and who is not. Are there any criteria by which the Home Secretary works, even if advised by the noble Lord, to justify who is refused admittance and who is not?

Lord West of Spithead: My Lords, there is effectively a list of things the Home Secretary will check through when she is making a decision about whether someone should be allowed into this country. Of course, as the House will well know, quite often we will say that someone should not come into this country, but they then appeal and, through our judicial system, it is decided that they should be allowed to do so. One of the great strengths and joys of this country is that there is a very robust approach to these things. Sometimes, it surprises many of us that that person is allowed to come in and continue to say things—that seems very strange, whatever persuasion they come from. There is a list, and it is checked through. As I said, the Home Secretary thought long and hard about this. The decision was based on a whole raft of things, not just on this film. I believe that it was the correct decision.

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: My Lords, I take this opportunity to thank the noble Lord, Lord Taverne, for asking this Question. I suggest to the Minister—perhaps he will correct me if I am wrong—that a man is innocent until he is proved guilty. I only have one question, because I know that we do not want to spend long on this. Does the noble Lord think that this situation would have occurred if Mr Wilders had said, “Ban the Bible”? If it would not have occurred, why not? Surely, the violence and the disturbance that may arise from showing this film in this country is not caused by the film, which merely attempts to show how the violent Islamist uses the Koran to perpetrate his terrible acts, but by the jihadist, the violent Islamist. In doing what the Government have done, surely they are therefore guilty of appeasement.

Lord West of Spithead: My Lords, I certainly do not think that we are guilty of appeasement in any way whatever. I do not want to go down the route of discussing a hypothetical case about what if he had talked about this or that. I am afraid that I am rather constrained about exactly what I can say about him. He is under prosecution in the Netherlands for incitement and discrimination. Clearly, anything that I say in this House could become involved in that, and I would not wish that to happen. It would be wrong if that was the case. Also, he can appeal against the Home Secretary’s decision, and anything that I say could be used there. As I said, we are very robust across the board. We take no sides on this. We treat people whom we believe are a threat to the security and safety of this nation in exactly the same way, from whatever cloth they come; that is extremely important. I believe that this was the right decision.

Lord Trimble: My Lords, the Minister has talked about incitement, and reference has been made to the possibility of counterprotests. These are public order matters. The criterion that the Minister should be operating under is public security, which is a different thing.

Lord West of Spithead: My Lords, again, I really cannot go too far down this route. These things will be looked at in the Court of Appeal and in the court of another nation. I do not wish to go down this route; I think that it would be wrong for me to do so.

Lord Peston: My Lords, will the Minister comment on one matter, which might enable us to make up our minds? Who brought this matter to the attention of the Home Secretary? Since this man is an EU citizen, he does not have to apply specially to come to our country. How did this become a matter of public policy?

Lord West of Spithead: My Lords, I am afraid that I cannot give my noble friend an answer to that question, because I am not quite sure how it came to the attention of the Home Secretary. I was first aware of this about a week ago. I do not know the answer. Perhaps I can write to my noble friend when I can discover the answer. _BrusselsJournal

The actions of the UK government are indefensible. Frightened out of their wits by the possibility of terrorism and riots within the UK, the cowards of the Home Office have publicly admitted that the protection of Islam is the guiding principle of UK policy at this time. When non-Muslims act as guardians of the Muslim faith, they are regarded as "Dhimmi." Appeasers. Also keep in mind that the Dutch government is prosecuting Wilders for exercising his free speech rights to warn against Islamic encroachment on freedoms within Europe, in his film, "Fitna."

The CIA projects that any near-future large scale attacks on the US by Muslim terrorists will be planned from the UK. Add to that nugget the fact that US President Obama is arranging for the UK to accept a large number of current residents of the Guantanamo terrorist holding facility on the island of Cuba. Out of sight, out of mind, eh Barack?

Dhimmis upon Dhimmis, what fools hold the seals of power in the western world. Suicidal fools.

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

A new government-financed bubble will soon be upon us and, like a runaway train, it cannot be stopped. _TheAge

It is one of history's great jokes that the US, with its traditions of "limited government", should be now be led by unlimited government proponents such as Obama and Pelosi, just when a century-long string of government excesses should come to a bubble-bursting climax.

Far from restoring the economy to health, the pork-barrel Pelosi plan will likely force the US economy into the catastrophe of acute stagflation and decline, with grave long-term repercussions at home and abroad.

....With the stakes this high, Pelosi should have restrained her urge to flex political muscle.

Most economists agree that America has enjoyed unprecedented prosperity, based primarily on excessive US dollar liquidity and unmanageable levels of debt. Thus, any healthy correction would necessarily involve serious deleveraging and a severe recession. After a lot of pain, the economy would rebuild with healthier fundamentals. Infrastructure improvement would aid, but not cause, the eventual recovery.

Recession is the natural cure for the politically inspired profligacy that America has enjoyed for almost 40 years. Unfortunately, the side effects of this medicine, namely the rapid reallocation of labor resources and deflationary damage to debtors, are still unpalatable to pandering politicians._Browne

Obama's apocalyptic threats -- of the irreversible devastation that would occur should he not get his way -- do not suggest leadership in the grand tradition of Churchill during the blitz. Instead, the push toward unlimited government powers and ever-building, unlimited government spending suggest more the Bernie Madoff scam artist of pyramid scheme fame.

This week President Obama claimed that failure to pass his economic stimulus bill will have catastrophic consequences for the U.S economy. The reality is the catastrophe will be far greater with his plan than without it. If the trends of January and early February of 2009 continue, the rug will be completely pulled out from beneath the U.S. economy, and the full cost of the President's "economic depressant package" will be apparent to all. _SeekingAlpha

It is difficult to believe that Pelosi et Obama actually understand the potential for economic devastation that lies within the current international financial stress point. Their actions suggest that they are viewing the crisis as an opportunity to consolidate power by rewarding powerful friends and by undermining the private sector of the economy -- which is viewed with mistrust and loathing by the unlimited government faction currently in control.

Obama and Pelosi do not understand the current problem. No wonder their "solution" is so perfectly crafted to make the problem considerably worse.

I fear that the trillions of government finance spent to save the world from "deflation" will, in the end, require perpetual needs for trillions more. There will be no kick-starting asset bubbles or a return of private-sector credit excess. Instead, it will be a case of throwing repeated doses of government-directed finance/purchasing power at the system. Temporary but fleeting economic boosts will then require only stronger doses of artificial stimulus.

We've commenced a new cycle dominated by government electronic printing presses in all their various forms. The inflationary consequences will be a different variety than we've grown accustomed to from previous reflations. But the bottom line is - and there's ample history to support this view - that once the "printing presses" get humming along it's going to be darn difficult to slow them down. _Noland

Friday, February 06, 2009

The reaction of the intellectual elite to Sarah Palin was far more provincial than Palin herself ever has been, and those who reacted so viscerally against her evinced little or no appreciation for an essential premise of democracy: that practical wisdom matters at least as much as formal education, and that leadership can emerge from utterly unexpected places. The presumption that the only road to power passes through the Ivy League and its tributaries is neither democratic nor sensible, and is, moreover, a sharp and wrongheaded break from the American tradition of citizen governance. _Commentary

America's effete elite got exactly who they wanted in the White House. Someone who talks and thinks like themselves. Someone as equally untouched and untempered by real life, with the proper degrees, friends, and attitude toward centralised control from "the top".

Meanwhile, America's schools and culture continues growing a large crop of perpetual adolescent incompetents, who take their cues from the effete elite via the entertainment and news media. The zombies of Obamby-land. Quite useful one day every two years, and particularly useful one day every four years. Otherwise, brain-dead zombies to be "managed."

If you learned the hard lessons of self-reliance, personal competencies, and working within the rules of society, you may not know how to talk the talk and walk the walk of the effete elite. If so, too bad for you if you want to break into national politics.

The reaction to Palin revealed a deep and intense cultural paranoia on the Left: an inclination to see retrograde reaction around every corner, and to respond to it with vile anger. A confident, happy, and politically effective woman who was also a social conservative was evidently too much to bear. The response of liberal feminists was in this respect particularly telling, and especially unpleasant.

“Her greatest hypocrisy is her pretense that she is a woman,” wrote Wendy Doniger, a professor at the University of Chicago. “Having someone who looks like you and behaves like them,” said Gloria Steinem, “who looks like a friend but behaves like an adversary, is worse than having no one.”

...In the end, Palin had a modest impact on the race. About 60 percent of those interviewed in the exit polls said McCain’s choice of Palin had been a factor in their vote. Of these, 56 percent voted for McCain while only 43 percent voted for Obama. In other words, she appears to have helped McCain more than she hurt him, but not by much, which is as it should be; we were voting for a President, after all. In the face of unprecedented attack, Palin succeeded where almost no vice-presidential candidate ever has before in winning sustained support for the ticket. _Commentary

Palin had real problems as a candidate. The news and entertainment media locked onto those weaknesses, and magnified them out of all reason and proportion. With Obama, they took exactly the opposite tack, and ignored any hint of weakness or deficiency.

They got what they wanted. And they continue to cover-up and obfuscate the huge problems of their Messiah. Zombies walk the land, oblivious. But real people, tough people, are tempered in the fire of real life. They keep living, keep growing, and keep getting tougher, because they face life full-on.

A society that grows top-heavy with a scummy faux elite, such as current American society, will eventually undergo significant changes. These changes will leave the unprepared, largely incompetent elite at a loss. The generations of zombies, psychological neotenates, are already lost -- beyond everything except technological revolutions that can remake their minds into those of real people. It's possible.

Thursday, February 05, 2009

Human history is full of examples of ambitious people who discovered the "back door password" into human minds. Using this key, turning human beings into zombie followers was not so difficult.

Throughout history, it seems as though individuals had the ability to sway others to follow them no matter where they [led]. In the las[t] century, both Hitler and Mussolini had the ability to bend millions of people to their fascist will.

...Scott Wiltermuth of Stanford University in California and colleagues have found that activities performed in unison, such as marching or dancing, increase loyalty to the group.

"It makes us feel as though we're part of a larger entity, so we see the group's welfare as being as important as our own," he says.

...Psychologist Jonathan Haidt at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville thinks this research helps explain why fascist leaders, amongst others, use organised marching and chanting to whip crowds into a frenzy of devotion to their cause....

...our brains are geared to mimic our peers.

"We are set up for 'auto-copy'," says Haidt.

Neurological evidence seems to back this idea. Vasily Klucharev, at the Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, found that the brain releases more of the reward chemical dopamine when we fall in line with the group consensus. _Source

Populist leaders who have learned the secret can seemingly come out of nowhere to control an entire population. While it appears that they have turned thinking humans into complete zombies, the true situation is more complex. The potential for zombification always existed, waiting for the proper key to fit the lock.

Far more interesting to me are the "skeptics", the "resisters". Independent thinking persons who generate their own goals and stoke their own energies to create their own lives, are the starting material for the next level. Zombies and would-be zombies are flimsy, too subject to the changing winds and tides. To create a next-level human, one must start with the best materials.

It is instructive to observe the history of the American colonies, as they evolved over time. Stubborn and strong minded persons tended to flock together and created one environment, while more pliable and group-minded persons flocked to create a different environment. As settlements of even the strongest-minded individuals evolved, natural flocking tendencies began to predominate, and the more independent persons migrated out to more open territory that required a tougher-minded sort.

There is little question but that the relative strength of independence vs. conformity lies at least partially in genetic factors. Environment no doubt plays a strong part in strengthening innate tendencies toward either group-think or independence. Executive function combined with IQ and other personality and character traits, all are both largely heritable and strongly influenced by environment. Why should zombie-potential be any different?

And perhaps we do not need to go back in history at all, to see successful examples of zombification?

Wednesday, February 04, 2009

A recent leftist radio station in Washington DC was forced to change its format due to lack of interest.

The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz reported Monday that "President Obama may be riding high in Washington, but OBAMA 1260 is not. The area's only progressive talk station is changing formats, dropping such syndicated liberal hosts as Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller and Bill Press in favor of financial news, starting next week." Kurtz continued:

Program Director Greg Tantum says he thought the station could work because of enthusiasm over Obama, but that ratings collapsed to a level that could not be measured after the election. But ratings nearly doubled, he says, at...conservative station, WTNT, which features Laura Ingraham and Bill Bennett. _Newsbusters_via_Wizbang

No one wants to listen to leftist radio -- why should they? Almost all of American media -- from comics to news to movies -- is completely devoted to the leftist Obama reich. Radio has become the haven for malcontents and conservative revolutionaries. The left is now the establishment, with all that entails.

Right wing talk radio thrives in the environment of government menace. The Obama government is the most menacing face of threat to freedom since the days of the great depression of the 1930s.

American conservatives tend to be small business owners and others with a stake in the economy. Leftists in America often tend to be tenured professors, trial lawyers, union activists, public employees, and others who typically live as parasites on others who actually produce something of worth. Obama policies appear to be tilting the advantage to parasitic forces such as trial lawyers and public employee unions. Such economy-bashing tendencies are seriously misplaced at any time, but are particularly misplaced in a significant recession and credit collapse.

When a nation's media behaves in a subservient and worshipful manner toward one particular political party, one of the most crucial checks and balances against government oppression is neutralised. When that particular political party also dominates almost all of the government agencies and planning functions, checks and balances are further destroyed.

The public may be slow to learn, but eventually the smarter members who have the most to lose from confiscatory and oppressive government policies will begin seeking out oppositional points of view to the monolithic media's suicidal appeasement to a budding tyranny. Talk radio is an outlet for growing societal unease with what it now, finally senses may have been a disastrous election.

Obama and Pelosi may attempt to shut down talk radio using various approaches of questionable constitutionality. The Constitution may not be an obstacle if they play their cards right. But if the O / P reich misunderstands the nature of talk radio as "safety valve", they may bungle themselves into the worst nightmare of their political careers, if not their entire lives.

The public can turn on its leaders in a heartbeat. The tyrannies of communist Europe learned that lesson 20 years ago.

Sunday, February 01, 2009

If you think the economic news cannot possibly get worse, take a look at the 30 minute excerpt of IOUSA THE MOVIE. The full length feature is meant to be shown in theatres and special venues, but 30 minutes is quite enough to get the basic idea.

Actually, anyone who remembers Ross Perot and his famous economic charts will be familiar with most of the ideas. The problem is that the situation has grown much worse since 1992. You want to hear something really scary? Over the next 10 to 20 years, the problem will grow exponentially worse.

Up until now, the surplus in FICA (Social Security) taxes has kept Americans from seeing the true extent of the problem. Bill Clinton's vaunted "balanced budget" years depended upon a blatant theft of the FICA surplus to pay for actual budget deficits. And Bill Clinton depended on Newt Gingrich and his boys to hold his feet to the fire, budget-wise. The US Congress in control now is a far cry from the budget hawks elected in 1994, and the US President now has no executive experience -- and seems to believe that the rules of economics do not apply to anything he decides to approve.

The US electorate is clearly unprepared for what is coming around the bend. The media cannot be trusted for truthful or objective reporting, so it is up to each voter and citizen to make himself informed on the deeper issues involved. That level of personal responsibility is extremely unlikely, among today's voters.

What I am trying to tell you, as gently as possible, is that the underlying economic landscape shaping the next few decades of the US economy, is dismal. Whether the Obama / Pelosi reich enables unions and trial lawyers to destroy private industry, whether nationalised medicine destroys the amazingly productive US pharmaceutical and medical technologies industries, whether the US government nationalises all banks and news media -- or not. The economy is in very big trouble.

The current credit and banking problems are significant but not cataclysmic. They can be dealt with as long as Obama / Pelosi do not come completely unhinged. The way the O / P reich wants to deal with the "climate catastrophe" is a good example of coming unhinged. Wasting a trillion dollars on useless mitigation, doing tens of trillions damage to industry, and creating a "political peak oil" that will make the summer of 2008 energy crisis look like a walk in the park....all that and more, you can expect O / P to attempt.

To Obama and Pelosi, the current relatively small crisis (worst since 1930s!) looks like a golden opportunity to turn the US into the socialist paradise of their dreams. To more disciplined and farsighted thinkers, the current problems are a not-so-gentle reminder that we have allowed too many bloated hogs to feed at a shrinking trough for far too long.

The combination of the commodities boom and bust, the financials crash, the mortgage default crisis, and the recent US election of the perfect storm of fools, should serve as a wake up call -- for those who are capable of waking up. Unfortunately, they appear to be few in number. Which leaves each person with important decisions to make.

We are not currently living through a repeat of the 1930s. Not yet. Obama and Pelosi have a long ways to go -- with the help of the Krugmans of the world -- to get things that bad. But when the demographic bust of unfunded mandates hits the fan, we might look back on the 1930s US with a sense of nostalgia.

Only a perfect storm combination of intelligent, aware, and responsible government officials throughout the congressional, executive, and judicial branches of US government will be able to mitigate the coming nightmare. Or, just maybe, the right combination of technological breakthroughs will give even typically feeble-minded government officials the courage to act responsibly -- or better yet, make government actions inconsequential to the real world.

We intend to cover both angles here at Al Fin. As always, be prepared.